One upmanship and Canon's claim

Robert Coe wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jul 2007 13:20:14 -0600, "Roger N. Clark (change username to
rnclark)" wrote:
: An interesting area. In the Masai tribe, boys as young as 8
: take cattle out for grazing and have to defend the cattle
: with only a wooden spear (single boy; dozen or so cattle).
: And they do a great job!

Maybe the lions haven't learned to differentiate a wooden spear from a rifle.

The Masai wear red, and historically killed lions.
The lions still know this and fear people wearing red.
Once we were photographing a pride of lions when a
safari vehicle got stuck in some mud a 1/4 mile away.
When one person got out who was wearing red, the lions
sat up and stared at the person, much like when prey
watch their predators: they want to know where the
predator is at all times, so they know when they
must flee.

So the boy with a spear is feared by lions not for the
spear, but his red robe.

Roger

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:

This is why religiously following "18-month" rule eliminates technical and
financial hardships. It's totally and utterly foolish to keep any dSLR body
past its useful life expectancy of 18-months.

Whatever you do with your camera bodies is probably illegal
in most states, if you get no more than 18 months out of them.
Wasteful, utterly wasteful. And stupid.

-Wolfgang

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 15:05:23 -0700, "Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number
wrote:
: Peter A. Stavrakoglou wrote:
: "Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in message
: ...
: Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
: Mark² wrote:
:
: We agree on that. I'm pretty disgusted, frankly. I'm a Canon guy,
: and like their stuff...but they've really screwed up on this one.
: At this level, they should either deliver the goods, or don't
: deliver at all. What's most frustrating is that they knew in
: advance about it (this is known due to their recognition of RG's
: review of a pre-production unit, and the later confirmation that
: the production units suffer the EXACT same problem Canon was
: notified about). When/if there is a fix, I'll likely be somewhere
: in Africa where it's
: impossible to benefit from it.
: Bummer.
:
: Mark,
: Have you talked directly to Canon technical support and
: told them of your impending trip? Maybe you could send them
: your 1D3 and they send you a 1D2 for your Africa trip
: (I would suggest that to them if they don't offer it).
: One could hope they will have a firmware update that
: solves the problem pretty quick.
:
: Roger
:
: Hmmm... That might be worth a try. I took my 1D3 to Irvine today,
: but I frankly don't expect a real fix when I pick it up on Monday. I
: might just try that...though I'll be gone for 7 weeks. They might
: not be too wild about such a long loan. If it doesn't appear that
: the camera is fixed (I'll take my laptop and test it), then I may
: try your suggestion. That's something I hadn't thought of...
:
: Thanks, Roger.
:
: Mark
:
: --
: Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
: www.pbase.com/markuson
:
: Oh yeah, have a good and safe trip too.
:
: Thanks. Safety will be an issue, as I'll be carrying major camera gear in
: some of the most crime-ridden areas in the world...traveling alone most of
: the time. We'll see how it goes...

So how did you make out at the Canon shop? Enquiring minds want to know!

Bob

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
Wolfgang Weisselberg wrote:

This is why religiously following "18-month" rule eliminates
technical and financial hardships. It's totally and utterly foolish
to keep any dSLR body past its useful life expectancy of 18-months.

Whatever you do with your camera bodies is probably illegal
in most states, if you get no more than 18 months out of them.
Wasteful, utterly wasteful. And stupid.

Nope, nothing illegal. I'm just following smart business practices to
maximize profits. You have to do what you have to do to scrape up enough
change for a cup of soup on a cold day.

The difference between
a) "bought new" and "sold after 18 months" and
b) "bought new" and "never sold"
is much smaller than
c) "use squeezed out of the item after it's 18 months old"

The depreciation of any technical item (and of cars, btw) is
highest in the first year. My guess is that in 18 months you
only loose 40-50% of the value, if you are lucky.

Given that a body will last for at least 5 years (unless you
break the shutter by soooo many actuations), you loose money.
The only exception would be if you can make more money with the
follow-up body, which I don't think you will, since the updates
are incremental anyway.

-Wolfgang

On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 20:10:22 -0400, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04
@aol.com wrote:

Maintenance costs alone will destroy any aspirations of keeping a dSLR for
more than 18-months.

I don't understand this at all; experience says otherwise.
Could you expand on this?

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Bill Clinton flew to Iowa Monday to make speeches
with Hillary Clinton before Iowa voters. Iowans
are always sorry to see the Clintons go home.
Whenever Bill and Hillary leave Iowa, the farmers
have to go back to fertilizing the crops themselves.

Bill Funk wrote:
On Wed, 4 Jul 2007 20:10:22 -0400, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04
@aol.com wrote:

Maintenance costs alone will destroy any aspirations of keeping a
dSLR for more than 18-months.

I don't understand this at all; experience says otherwise.
Could you expand on this?

I doubt it. It was a silly statement.
If you're shooting 100,000 images a year, then perhaps you'll routinely run
into shutter replacement every couple years...but beyond that, the statement
is silly.

--
Images (Plus Snaps & Grabs) by Mark² at:
www.pbase.com/markuson

Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
Bill Funk wrote:

Maintenance costs alone will destroy any aspirations of keeping a
dSLR for more than 18-months.

I don't understand this at all; experience says otherwise.
Could you expand on this?

After 18-months of being used properly you generally have maintenance
issues
to contend with. It is worse if you wear out a shutter assembly
prematurely. I know Canon had a streak of bad shutters that were taking a
dump just after 15k actuations. It all eats into your useable lifecycle.

Here is my maintenance costs on my DSLRs:

D60 from 2002 to 2007: $0.00
10D from 2003 to 2007: $0.00
1DII from 2004 to 2007: $0.00
30D 2007: $0.00

I no longer have the D60, but the gur I sold it to has
used it as his primary camera for the last
couple of years, and many tens of thousands of pictures
per year typically shot on these cameras.

(Knock on wood--I'm having a spat of failures this week:
stereo, a computer, my ankle (twisted it hiking)
1.5 terabyte raid away lost directory info, probably
a few other things too.)

Roger

On Jul 5, 9:20 pm, "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)"
wrote:
Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
Bill Funk wrote:

Maintenance costs alone will destroy any aspirations of keeping a
dSLR for more than 18-months.

I don't understand this at all; experience says otherwise.
Could you expand on this?

After 18-months of being used properly you generally have maintenance
issues
to contend with. It is worse if you wear out a shutter assembly
prematurely. I know Canon had a streak of bad shutters that were taking a
dump just after 15k actuations. It all eats into your useable lifecycle.

Here is my maintenance costs on my DSLRs:

D60 from 2002 to 2007: $0.00
10D from 2003 to 2007: $0.00
1DII from 2004 to 2007: $0.00
30D 2007: $0.00

You mean repair bills?
Any canned air or wipes for dust removal used?

On Thu, 05 Jul 2007 19:11:03 -0700, RichA wrote:
: On Jul 5, 9:20 pm, "Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark)"
: wrote:
: Rita Ä Berkowitz wrote:
: Bill Funk wrote:
:
: Maintenance costs alone will destroy any aspirations of keeping a
: dSLR for more than 18-months.
:
: I don't understand this at all; experience says otherwise.
: Could you expand on this?
:
: After 18-months of being used properly you generally have maintenance
: issues to contend with. It is worse if you wear out a shutter assembly
: prematurely. I know Canon had a streak of bad shutters that were taking a
: dump just after 15k actuations. It all eats into your useable lifecycle.
:
: Here is my maintenance costs on my DSLRs:
:
: D60 from 2002 to 2007: $0.00
: 10D from 2003 to 2007: $0.00
: 1DII from 2004 to 2007: $0.00
: 30D 2007: $0.00
:
: You mean repair bills?
: Any canned air or wipes for dust removal used?

Are you proposing to capitalize the cost of canned air and dust wipes? You're
not a professional accountant, I hope.

Bob

On Thu, 5 Jul 2007 17:46:05 -0400, Rita Ä Berkowitz ritaberk2O04
@aol.com wrote:

Bill Funk wrote:

Maintenance costs alone will destroy any aspirations of keeping a
dSLR for more than 18-months.

I don't understand this at all; experience says otherwise.
Could you expand on this?

After 18-months of being used properly you generally have maintenance issues
to contend with. It is worse if you wear out a shutter assembly
prematurely. I know Canon had a streak of bad shutters that were taking a
dump just after 15k actuations. It all eats into your useable lifecycle.

Could you define, "used properly"?
It's evident from the above that you define this differently than I
do.

--
THIS IS A SIG LINE; NOT TO BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY!

Al Gore's son was pulled over by cops in Southern
California Tuesday going one hundred miles an hour
in his Prius. He had marijuana, Valium, Xanax and
Vicodin in the car. The Los Angeles Times headline
read, Prius Goes One Hundred Miles an Hour.